Implementing Anti-Oppressive Practice in Youth Care Settings

Introduction

Staff members in youth care systems understand structural inequalities exists although

implementation of anti-oppressive practice (AOP) remains shallow and irregular according to

Baines (2011). The study examines how anti-oppressive practice must be utilized in child and

youth care organizations to produce measurable organizational changes that benefit

disadvantaged young people.

Significance statement

The implementation of anti-oppressive practice needs thorough research in child and youth care

development because it directly upholds fundamental ethical requirements (Moore, 2001). The

core principles of child and youth care practice achieve fulfillment through anti-oppressive

practice methods which establish environments that protect dignity while empowering youth

while addressing societal wellness barriers. The current societal environment requires heightened

focus on this investigation because people now prefer social care tactics that address systemic

discriminatory practices (Dominelli, 2018). The paper contains essential details that

professionals working in residential care services and community-based programs and

educational institutions need to understand because youth experiences depend heavily on how

power operates. The research analyzes established implementation methods and current obstacles

to create an organization-wide training mechanism that develops standardized anti-oppressive

approaches which improve social outcomes for youth populations in need according to Anglin

(2013). Youth care services need complete adoption of anti-oppressive practice throughout all

their levels to address power-related inequalities when working with disadvantaged young
people. The anti-oppressive principles advocated by organizations face significant discrepancies

because there is a wide gap between what officials theoretically approve and what actually

happens in service delivery (de Finney et al., 2011). The theoretical-practical disconnect allows

destructive power dynamics to persist while blocking unsuccessful responses to discriminatory

experiences among young people from various backgrounds such as Indigenous or racial clusters

and members of LGBTQ2S+ groups and young people with disabilities.

Background

Youth care uses a dual strategy for anti-oppressive practice which concentrates on

intersectionality and structural obstacles. Professional practice today demands personnel to

navigate different discrimination types simultaneously because practices have become

intersectional types (Gosine & Pon, 2011). Youth care professionals currently engage with

remarkable methods to address complex situations that arise from multiple forms of

discrimination.

Youth service theory development progressed but practical barriers persist because institutions

resist change and achieve limited success with funding and training (Maiter, 2009). Current

inadequate implementation of theoretical guidance produces negative consequences on youth

who stand at the highest risk level.

Position

According to Baines (2011) Anti-oppressive practice reaches success through the implementation

of a three-step procedure.

1. Every daily encounter between staff members and young people needs close application of

anti-oppressive methods together with an evaluation of staff-to-youth power dynamics.

2. The entire organizational operational level should follow anti-oppressive principles through

organized policies and structural systems.

3. Staff members use systemic methods in youth care to address and transform major social

divisions which impact young people.

Research evidence shows that achieving successful AOP implementation creates enhanced youth

involvement and improved minority outcome results for disadvantaged youth population (Smith,

2010). Research on trauma-informed care shows that system-wide power equality strategies form

the basis for recovery and healing according to Bloom & Sreedhar (2008).

Supporting Arguments

Professionals who implement anti-oppressive interactions in their daily work improve the care

experiences of those receiving services.

Anti-oppressive child and youth care workers create practice spaces leading to environments

which promote both dignity and respect. According to Gharabaghi and Stuart (2013) theoretical

principles transform into practical youth interaction methods. A high level of relationship

development occurs between caregivers and youths thanks to anti-oppressive practice which

combines awareness of power imbalances and authority sharing between practitioners.

Professional services gain from practitioner efforts to understand the firsthand activist

experiences of young people according to West (2019) because such knowledge enables

practitioners to deliver anti-oppressive daily interactions. The method adheres to the moral

principles set by Wong and Yee (2010) in their child welfare anti-oppression model.

Organizations must create structures which actively promote the delivery of anti-oppressive

practice.
The research shows that staff in every organizational layer with effective leadership creates

stable support for anti-oppressive practice according to Bloom and Sreedhar (2008). When

practitioners do not receive organizational backing their personal work fails to generate system-

wide transformation. Healthcare organizations must provide needed resources for training

employees with policies that embed anti-oppressive principles into every stage of care delivery.

Gosine and Pon (2011) identified the difficulties racialized child welfare employees experience

to use anti-oppressive practices because their organizations create barriers so they require

organizational support. The literature evaluates "the obstacles which prevent proper

implementation of anti-oppressive practice by studying institutional pushback and lack of

resources alongside unprepared practice staff" (Baines, 2011). Institutional commitment

functions as a necessary component to handle implementation challenges.

Argument 3: Integration with Existing Therapeutic Models Enhances Effectiveness

Anti-oppressive practice improves the outcome of standard child and youth care practice

methods like trauma-informed care along with strength-based practice (Brendtro et al., 2012).

The integrated framework addresses personal recovery needs at the same time it addresses

institutionally created unfairness. The combination of approaches leads to better cultural safety

results in care settings without compromising treatment effectiveness.

Counterarguments and Refutations

Normal operational function of Anti-oppressive practice is not possible in youth care settings

because the level of political involvement becomes excessive.

Social services should avoid political elements according to anti-oppressive practice because

they contradict the supposed nonpartisan nature of youth care (DiAngelo, 2011).
The existence of Youth care relies on political contexts because its operational systems depend

on power-determined systems that create social marginalization. By claiming neutrality power

systems remain unchanged without any alteration. Regular implementation of anti-oppressive

care leads to improved service outcomes with better results for young people according to

empirical data (West, 2019).

Various organizations face challenges in allocating enough resources needed to execute this

process.

Elemental implementation of anti-oppressive practice demands considerable funding that many

facilities struggle to provide properly (Maiter, 2009).

The price of ignoring systemic inequalities exceeds the financial needs for proper anti-oppressive

practice implementation that requires training along with organizational development. Proper

implementation of AOP creates positive benefits for young people that lead to decreased costs in

providing intensive and expensive treatments (de Finney et al., 2011).

Conclusion and Recommendations

The research demonstrates that youth care facilities need complete implementation of broad anti-

oppressive practice to create essential system modifications that benefit vulnerable youth

populations (Baskin, 2016). These following recommendations serve as my basis from this

position:

1. The development of practical skills in staff members conducting anti-oppressive work with

young people must form a core element of their professional training program.
2. Organizations need to create assessment tools that identify barriers to anti-oppressive practice

to establish new growth solutions.

3. Every level within the organization requires specific policies that specify responsibilities for

implementing anti-oppressive principles.

4. The combination of established anti-oppressive practice standards with therapeutic methods

provides organizations with complex therapeutic frameworks.

5. The development of anti-oppressive practices must involve youths as participants for

collecting needed insights for implementation evaluation processes.

Applications of these suggested steps at youth care facilities will bridge the gap between theory

and practice to deliver authentic support systems to all adolescent populations (United Nations

Office of the High Commissioner, n.d.).

 References

Anglin, J. P. (2013). Pain, normality, and the struggle for congruence: Reinterpreting residential

care for children and youth. Child & Youth Services, 34(3), 225-243.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935X.2013.785877

Baines, D. (2011). Doing anti-oppressive practice: Social justice social work (2nd ed.).

Fernwood Publishing.

Baskin, C. (2016). Strong helpers' teachings: The value of Indigenous knowledges in the helping

professions (2nd ed.). Canadian Scholars' Press.

Bloom, S. L., & Sreedhar, S. Y. (2008). The Sanctuary Model of Trauma-Informed

Organizational Change. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 17(3), 48-53.

https://doi.org/10.1037/e621642012-215

Brendtro, L. K., Mitchell, M. L., Freado, M. D., & du Toit, L. (2012). The Developments Audit:

From Deficits to Strengths. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 21(1), 7-13.

de Finney, S., Dean, M., Loiselle, E., & Saraceno, J. (2011). All children are equal, but some are

more equal than others: Minoritization, structural inequities, and social justice praxis in

residential care. International Journal of Child, Youth and Family Studies, 2(3/4), 361-

384. https://doi.org/10.18357/ijcyfs23/420117756

DiAngelo, R. (2011). White fragility. The International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 3(3).

https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340215586559

Dominelli, L. (2018). Anti-racist social work (4th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.

Gharabaghi, K., & Stuart, C. (2013). Right here, right now: Exploring life-space interventions for

children and youth. Pearson Education Canada.

Gosine, K., & Pon, G. (2011). On the front lines: The voices and experiences of racialized child

welfare workers in Toronto, Canada. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 22(2), 135-

159. https://doi.org/10.1080/10428232.2011.599280

Maiter, S. (2009). Using an anti-racist framework for assessment and intervention in clinical

practice with families from diverse ethno-racial backgrounds. Clinical Social Work

Journal, 37(4), 267-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-009-0198-0

Moore, P. (2001). Critical components of an anti-oppressive framework. Journal of Child and

Youth Care, 14(3), 25-32.

Smith, A. B. (2010). Children as citizens and partners in strengthening communities.American

Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 80(1), 103-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-

0025.2010.01012.x

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner. (n.d.). Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Retrieved from

https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child

West, A. (2019). Critical perspectives on youth empowerment: Learning from the lived

experiences of young people engaged in anti-oppressive activism. Children and Youth

Services Review, 98, 251-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.01.006